As long as Windows is alive so is WPF and WinForms and while they are "dead" in terms of roadmap advancements they are and will be supported for 20yrs (or give or take a few years). Microsoft has certain rules about killing tech like these and given there are military and govt contracts in play killing "tech" is next to impossible until they sunset.
Transferring XAML skills to <insert your choice of thingy here> is like stating "I learnt C therefore i can do Java / C# right?" ..theory yes, but its always the execution and debugging that gets you :) It wouldn't hurt to go WPF if that's the only two choices you have and depends on the context. I use WPF still and have seen many companies big and small File-->WPF project still. Keep your hardcore business logic in some PCL's as much as possible and assume your UI is disposable after say 1-5 years and you'll be fine. Downside is if you haven't got WPF devs on staff and need to order in some (Consultancy or FTE's) the the $$ could be an issue or the time to ramp up to WPF learning is painful. That being said, you will suffer this fate going UWP anyway (maybe the blog posts are fresher now but thats even a * conditions apply) moment. Design surfaces are still the same crappy experience so if you want to engage "designers" into your project be prepared to create what Jeremy Cade and I are calling "Designer Ops" bloodlines into the team who's job is to take pretty pixesl and not bend them into a distorted mess when injecting them into the codebase? Other than that... --- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote: > I delayed going to WPF for years as I was so familiar with WinForms and it > had a designer (which occasionally gets corrupted). If you want a > reasonably standard UI then both WinForms and WPF produce similar results, > but if you want a user "experience" then WPF has all the transformations > and eye candy. > > Once you learn to write XAML by hand without a designer (it's just a > preview window) and you create an MVVM pattern to use binding, then it's > the choice for large desktop apps. Binding is fabulous. > > XAML continues to live and grow in Universal apps. > > *Greg K* > > On 25 September 2015 at 15:16, DotNet Dude <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Universal apps ad xaml are still getting quite a push from MS >> >> On Friday, 25 September 2015, Corneliu I. Tusnea <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Nope. They are dead. (As far as I'm concerned) unless you really really >>> really really need to go down that crazy path. >>> >>> If you really really want a desktop app I'd look into >>> http://electron.atom.io/ to run a cross-platform "desktop" app build >>> with web technologies on top of Chrome. >>> Atom editor is build like that. Visual Studio Code is build in a similar >>> fashion but not on top of electron but pretty much identical process. >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Tom Rutter <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Anyone here still using winforms? Any reason to start new projects in >>>> winforms over WPF? How far has WPF come in the last several years? >>>> >>> >>> >
